Video released of the incident check the new sites. It's hardly thrilling, but I do believe you can see GWB waterskiing off the back of one of the boats.

I'm betting every Navy ship is at general quarters when passing though the Straights of Hormuz and what you don't see on the video is the guns tracking those boats and the repair parties/boarding parties and other stations all manned up.

The near-clash occurred over the weekend in the Strait of Hormuz. On the U.S.-released recording, a voice can be heard saying to the Americans, "I am coming to you. You will explode after a few minutes."

The Navy never said specifically where the voices came from, but many were left with the impression they had come from the speedboats because of the way the Navy footage was edited.

Today, the spokesperson for the U.S. admiral in charge of the Fifth Fleet clarified to ABC News that the threat may have come from the Iranian boats, or it may have come from somewhere else.

And the thing that really gets me with all this warmongering aimed at Iran is... how many countries have they attacked in the last 100 years?

Israel. They fund Hezbollah.

Yawn. And the US funds terrorist groups in Iran, and Iraq, and used to fund terrorist attacks on the USSR, blah blah.

So why aren't we at war with Saudi Arabia? They funded 9/11, after all, and as GWB and Rudy and every right wing pundit tells us... 9/11 changed everything. So why are they giving a pardon to Saudi Arabia and Osama? It seems like on 9/12 they slipped back into a pre-9/11 mindset.

And the thing that really gets me with all this warmongering aimed at Iran is... how many countries have they attacked in the last 100 years?

Israel. They fund Hezbollah.

Interesting week. GWB announces his intent to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, a country which helped finance 9/11, provided passports to the attackers, etc... and also a country which has, in the past, attacked Israel.

However... the warmongering continues against Iran, a country which not only never attacked Israel, but actually had diplomatic relations with them prior to the UK/US tried installing their own puppet government there.

The most hilarious thing about all the warmongering speech is everything they say is bad about Iran is the exact thing they overlook regarding their buddies in North Korea. In fact, NK is far, far, far worse of a threat, since they occasionally fire off missiles over their neighbors (especially Japan), and not only have a nuclear program (and weapon), but have a history of irresponsible and hostile military activities.

But best of all is the "zOMG, we got Punk'd!!!11" defense about why their claims were false. Not that GWB got the memo, because he's still acting like it happened that way. But hey, we already knew the Bubble Boy lives in his own little world.

Calling for the destruction of a country and then giving a group all the money and weapons they want so that can attack Israel, pretty much is attacking them directly. Just because Iran didn't send their official army doesn't mean Iran is not guilty of attacking Israel.

The US government found no evidence of the Saudi government being involved in 9/11. So conspiracy groups are the only ones I have seen saying there is any connection.

Calling for the destruction of a country and then giving a group all the money and weapons they want so that can attack Israel, pretty much is attacking them directly. Just because Iran didn't send their official army doesn't mean Iran is not guilty of attacking Israel.

So then, since the USA was financing Al Qaeda and the Taliban... by your logic, that means America was responsible for 9/11.

Quote

The US government found no evidence of the Saudi government being involved in 9/11. So conspiracy groups are the only ones I have seen saying there is any connection.

Just because the terrorists are from a certain country doesn't mean that they are backed by the government, so your point is moot.

And yet, you would have me believe the opposite is true of your claim against Iran?

Quote

The US funded AQ during the Russian years, they became our enemy and we were not funding them, so again, your point doesn't really apply.

So you say. But see, all the things you claim (well really, the claims you are repeating)... were created by whom? This thread is a perfect place to discuss it, because what was the original claim, which I immediately said was false... and was later proven 100% correct on?

You are believing the claims of people who have, over time, been demonstrated to be completely wrong on everything. LITERALLY everything.

Remember those WMD? Did those ever turn up? All the exact same claims they are making now, about Iran... we've already heard them!!! They said the EXACT same crap about Iraq!!!

So I can't really say anything bad about you, but I really wish you would look into their claims for yourself, and see how nobody with any credibility believes them. Even the CIA isn't supporting any of these claims against Iran. So if it isn't coming from the CIA, or the FBI, or from our military intelligence... where are Bush/Cheney getting their info from? Their gut? Phone call from God? Clairvoyance?

The only reason we haven't attacked Iran yet is because of push-back from the military commanders and the intelligence community. If the US were to attack Iran, there's a really serious possibility it would start World War III. There's only so much unchecked aggression the world will put up for, and our military is already bogged down in Bush's Rhineland, or Syracuse, or whatever other historical analogy you want to draw.

I simply can't understand how people refuse to grasp the sheer illegitimacy of what was done in Iraq... and yet seem to shrug and consider it ok when Bush wants draw OUR country into inflicting the exact same war crime on another country.

Just because the terrorists are from a certain country doesn't mean that they are backed by the government, so your point is moot.

And yet, you would have me believe the opposite is true of your claim against Iran?

No. Iran openly admits they want the destruction of Israel. Iran openly funds and equips Hezbollah. One of Hezbollah official goals is the destruction of Israel. I am not going off any extreme sites here, this is all known fact. Iran may not be attacking Israel with their national guard, but they are having their guard train Hezbollah who does attack Israel.

I am not saying Iran is a threat to us, I am saying they are a threat to peace in the ME. Anyway the whole reason I got into this debate is because you said Iran never attacked Israel, which is only true in that they don't do it with their army, they just fund/equip/train other groups to do it for them. And I am not saying we don't do the same thing, and we do its no different from what Iran is doing. But we funded AQ to support our goals when their goals were different.

Well, Bush is definitely beating the Iran drum for some reason and I'm inclined to agree with unbreakable- that while I don't quite go so far as to say it's warmongering- he's definitely trying to distract us from something.

Just because the terrorists are from a certain country doesn't mean that they are backed by the government, so your point is moot.

And yet, you would have me believe the opposite is true of your claim against Iran?

No. Iran openly admits they want the destruction of Israel. Iran openly funds and equips Hezbollah. One of Hezbollah official goals is the destruction of Israel. I am not going off any extreme sites here, this is all known fact. Iran may not be attacking Israel with their national guard, but they are having their guard train Hezbollah who does attack Israel.

And you speak Farsi and have confirmed all this? Or are you trusting what others have said?

Because remember that video of all those people in the street cheering about 9/11? Yeah... that turned out to be not so true either, it was archive footage of some kind of celebration, and the "liberal media" looking to justify the war just sort of accidentally told everyone in the country... well, you can put the pieces together.

Oh, and remember that time they tried to tell us Iranian boats were attacking our ships in the Persian Gulf, and it turned out they just got Punk'd by Ashton Kutcher? That was good times.

Quote

I am not saying Iran is a threat to us, I am saying they are a threat to peace in the ME.

And you say that because they've attacked.... um... who exactly?

You are arguing that words are the equivalent of sticks and stones.

Considering even a "win" in Iraq and Afghanistan means we've already reduced two countries to a rubble filled depleted uranium wasteland, it's just shocking to hear someone arguing FOR doing that to yet another country... on the auspices that THEY are a threat to peace in the middle east. Which of course completely ignores the issue of legitimacy and why one would think it's the USA's job to bring peace at the end of a gun or bomb. Contrary to popular opinion, we don't own the Middle East, OR the oil under it.

Well, Bush is definitely beating the Iran drum for some reason and I'm inclined to agree with unbreakable- that while I don't quite go so far as to say it's warmongering- he's definitely trying to distract us from something.

Actually I think its directly about oil. The whole Caspain pipeline dream, has been on the adminstration's forefront since 2002. They've pretty much admited that Iran is a key roadblock to that success. FYI, in case you think this is a partisain thing its not, Clinton tried to build the pipeline also, but it was called a pipe dream, again because of Iran and a few other contries in the region that are historircally unstable (edit: or unfriendly). However, we've overthrown one goverment, and got another off the embargo list so we are set to put our sights on Iran. I'm sure the oil companies are terrified that whoever replaced Bush won't as friendly to this goal so their might be a certain feeling of urgency with the Admin right now, they also have to balance the hostility globally to further conflict including within US. I'm just worried that the Admin in order to ensure its legacy of being the principal for the Caspain pipeline is going to create a international nightmare before they leave office

Unbreakable, who am I supposed to believe then? I can find references all over the net to Iran and Hezbollah being linked, but you just choose not to believe it. it's kind of pointless to debate with you if you won't believe anything except what you want to.

The lamest thing about this whole Caspain pipeline agenda is that the strategy is based on taking advantage of deverting oil from Moscow. The Caspain oil reserves were orignally part of the soviet resources, since the collapse we are trying to move in and ensure that moscow doesnt reclaim those reserves. With the renewed hardline out of Moscow this agenda to me just seems insane! Lets piss off moscow, and start the whole cold war again! Brillant!

Unbreakable, who am I supposed to believe then? I can find references all over the net to Iran and Hezbollah being linked, but you just choose not to believe it. it's kind of pointless to debate with you if you won't believe anything except what you want to.

Believe people who have been correct in the past. That doesn't sound too difficult.

Unbreakable, who am I supposed to believe then? I can find references all over the net to Iran and Hezbollah being linked, but you just choose not to believe it. it's kind of pointless to debate with you if you won't believe anything except what you want to.

Believe people who have been correct in the past. That doesn't sound too difficult.

Unbreakable, who am I supposed to believe then? I can find references all over the net to Iran and Hezbollah being linked, but you just choose not to believe it. it's kind of pointless to debate with you if you won't believe anything except what you want to.

Believe people who have been correct in the past. That doesn't sound too difficult.

Well literally everyone says Hezbollah is funded and reveres Iran. Hezbollah doesn't deny attacking Israel, in fact they use Iranian weapons. I am not sure how you can ignore Iran calling for the destruction of Israel and then claim that they have nothing to do with attacks on them. Again they attack them directly, that doesn't mean they aren't involved.

Unbreakable, who am I supposed to believe then? I can find references all over the net to Iran and Hezbollah being linked, but you just choose not to believe it. it's kind of pointless to debate with you if you won't believe anything except what you want to.

Believe people who have been correct in the past. That doesn't sound too difficult.

Well literally everyone says Hezbollah is funded and reveres Iran. Hezbollah doesn't deny attacking Israel, in fact they use Iranian weapons. I am not sure how you can ignore Iran calling for the destruction of Israel and then claim that they have nothing to do with attacks on them. Again they attack them directly, that doesn't mean they aren't involved.

Literally everyone? I don't say it, so it can't be literally everyone.

Also... just because Hezbollah "reveres" Iran doesn't make them an affiliate (and that seems like a horribly vacuous claim anyway. What is that supposed to mean, exactly?). There are terrorist groups attacking Turkey who "revere" the USA. So does that mean we are attacking Turkey? In fact, they are indirectly getting funding from the USA, and using some US-made weapons.

So I guess America is at war with Turkey. Why do we hate Turkey?

We are funding Pakistan, and Pakistan is actually helping the Taliban take over their country. So why is the USA funding the Taliban? Again, actually.

And GWB was pushing really hard for elections in Palestine, which made Hezbollah the official and legitimate government of Palestine. So... why is George W Bush legitimizing Hezbollah?

And then when he didn't like the election results, he back Hamas, another terrorist group, and got them to overthrow the democratic government he just set up. Why is America financing and arming Hamas, a group which attacks Israel? And why is America helping the overthrow of a democratically elected government? ...which it had just set up and proclaimed as a triumph?

So my point is, with all the lies and circular logic and self-defeating actions... I'm just shocked when someone states anything this administration says is credible. Did I have some kind of secret inside knowledge which made me correct that Iranian boats didn't actually attack or threaten our ships in the Gulf? No, I just know the Bush administration has zero credibility, and can be 100% accurate by always stating the truth must be the opposite of what they say.

Literally everyone? I don't say it, so it can't be literally everyone.

Also... just because Hezbollah "reveres" Iran doesn't make them an affiliate (and that seems like a horribly vacuous claim anyway. What is that supposed to mean, exactly?). There are terrorist groups attacking Turkey who "revere" the USA. So does that mean we are attacking Turkey? In fact, they are indirectly getting funding from the USA, and using some US-made weapons.

So I guess America is at war with Turkey. Why do we hate Turkey?

Anyone who knows anything about the situation. Do a search for Hezbollah funding. Really you need to do some reading on Hezbollah because your denial really makes it sound like you haven't.

Reveres in that it follows an Islamist Shi'a ideology developed by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. It wants the same things as Iran. Destruction of Israel which they both readily admit.

Who said anything about being at war? I am saying Iran is a threat to Israel and ME peace.

The US is not funding Kurds to attack Turkey. We are not calling for the destruction of Turkey. But yes I am sure Turkey is not happy with us for helping the Kurds, even though we are funding them for other reasons. But then again Turkey wants to wipe out the Kurds, so we are helping them defend themselves. Really doesn't compare to the Iran/Hezbollah thing.

And really Unbreakable, we are the same wave length here, I am definitely not trusting of the government at times, nor the press, and I don't think Iran is as a huge problem to US as Bush would like us to think. But to say they are just some harmless nation just isn't true. They are very much a threat to Israel and their actions re-enforce that. Israel is a close ally of ours, so we are involved.

Anyone who knows anything about the situation. Do a search for Hezbollah funding. Really you need to do some reading on Hezbollah because your denial really makes it sound like you haven't.

But the matter is, I really don't care, and it really doesn't matter. We have been funding people, and people attacking our allies, and people attacking us. So in light of all that, it's really a glass house kind of issue.

The fact of the matter is, Iran has not attacked anybody, at all, they HAVE been attacked many times, and especially by the USA, and by terrorist groups funded by the USA. But somehow... Iran putting money into their own defense forces is... GASP!!! going to cause "instability" in the region.

What kind of "stability" are you talking about? Does "stability" mean that the USA can attack them at will without fear of reprisal? Is that what "stability" is defined as? Because when you cut through all the rhetoric, that's all it appears to be.

Quote

The US is not funding Kurds to attack Turkey. We are not calling for the destruction of Turkey. But yes I am sure Turkey is not happy with us for helping the Kurds, even though we are funding them for other reasons. But then again Turkey wants to wipe out the Kurds, so we are helping them defend themselves. Really doesn't compare to the Iran/Hezbollah thing.

Really? It's amazing how there are over $10 billion USD unaccounted for over there... but you can magically guarantee that NONE of that money is going to terrorist groups? Wow... that's pretty amazing, since nobody officially knows what happened to ANY of that money. Or the 150,000 weapons which Betrayus was in charge of. Or tons of plastic explosives.

But hey, anonomous dude on internet said it, so I'll change my mind, and start believing in the Surge!

Quote

And really Unbreakable, we are the same wave length here, I am definitely not trusting of the government at times, nor the press, and I don't think Iran is as a huge problem to US as Bush would like us to think. But to say they are just some harmless nation just isn't true. They are very much a threat to Israel and their actions re-enforce that. Israel is a close ally of ours, so we are involved.

I could care less whether they are harmless or whatever. I'm just saying they aren't the huge threat people are making them out to be, and they certainly don't warrant the USA creating another humanitarian disaster effecting at least a few MILLION people in the name of "stability". The USA created more civilian casualties in a few years than Saddam caused in his entire carreer. And Saddam didn't poison Iraq with depleted uranium in doing so, either... but he did do all that with US funding.

So as always, I'm saying the best alternative is to deal fairly with people, and let the kids work things out for themselves. Iran IS allowed to have a civilian nuclear energy program, since they are a member of the NNPT... whether the USA and Israel like it or not. But as always, the rules which apply to everyone somehow magically don't apply to the USA or, by proxy, to whoever they say it doesn't.

If we stop doing that kind of shit, maybe people will stop complaining about us.

I tend to agree. Wait until Iran announces they have a bomb, THEN nuke their asses to kingdom come. Not before.

Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush."Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."

I tend to agree. Wait until Iran announces they have a bomb, THEN nuke their asses to kingdom come. Not before.

So... IF they get a nuclear missile (they aren't going to use a bomb, since that implies being dropped from a plane, which only works if you can get something close to air superiority, which they can't)... it's going to be used as a nuclear deterrent.

When you talk to others in the region, nobody thinks having an Iran with a nuclear deterrent is that big a deal... and they certainly like that option more than another GWB-created devastation. Also... it's not that smart, strategically speaking, to nuke someone when they have a nuclear deterrent, since that will actually cause them to USE the missile(s), rather than holding them as a check against being nuked. It's kind of like running up to a bear and shooting him in the ass with a slingshot, just because you think it would be cool to tell your friends about.

Plus, I'm not sure anyone in the region would be all that happy about the nuclear fallout blowing all over. Finally, such an action would likely cause the world to unite against the USA. Personally, I wouldn't mind a regime change and having a whole lot of US leaders taken away to the Hague, but I'm not entirely sure what the costs to us would be. We can all be assured they wouldn't go quietly, no matter what the American people actually want. It's not like Mr. 24% ever gave a damn what everyone in the country thought anyway... but what the American people think has never influenced foreign policy anyhow. There's never been popular support for the embargo of Cuba, for example.

I tend to agree. Wait until Iran announces they have a bomb, THEN nuke their asses to kingdom come. Not before.

So... IF they get a nuclear missile (they aren't going to use a bomb, since that implies being dropped from a plane, which only works if you can get something close to air superiority, which they can't)... it's going to be used as a nuclear deterrent.

When you talk to others in the region, nobody thinks having an Iran with a nuclear deterrent is that big a deal... and they certainly like that option more than another GWB-created devastation. Also... it's not that smart, strategically speaking, to nuke someone when they have a nuclear deterrent, since that will actually cause them to USE the missile(s), rather than holding them as a check against being nuked. It's kind of like running up to a bear and shooting him in the ass with a slingshot, just because you think it would be cool to tell your friends about.

Plus, I'm not sure anyone in the region would be all that happy about the nuclear fallout blowing all over. Finally, such an action would likely cause the world to unite against the USA. Personally, I wouldn't mind a regime change and having a whole lot of US leaders taken away to the Hague, but I'm not entirely sure what the costs to us would be. We can all be assured they wouldn't go quietly, no matter what the American people actually want. It's not like Mr. 24% ever gave a damn what everyone in the country thought anyway... but what the American people think has never influenced foreign policy anyhow. There's never been popular support for the embargo of Cuba, for example.

I think the worry is that if Iran is involved in funding and arming Hezbollah (I know you don't believe that, but there are many who do,) and other terrorist organizations then a nuclear capable Iran could help these organizations get a nuclear device. I don't advocate nuking Iran of course. But I think it is in the west's best interest to keep them from becoming nuclear capable.

I tend to agree. Wait until Iran announces they have a bomb, THEN nuke their asses to kingdom come. Not before.

So... IF they get a nuclear missile (they aren't going to use a bomb, since that implies being dropped from a plane, which only works if you can get something close to air superiority, which they can't)... it's going to be used as a nuclear deterrent.

When you talk to others in the region, nobody thinks having an Iran with a nuclear deterrent is that big a deal...

That's an interesting position. Its very similar to the NRA's argument. To paraphrase, "nukes don't kill people, people do." So, is there any situation at all where you might think that country A having a nuke would be a bad bad idea?

Here's a thought: Israel most likely has a nuke as a deterrent against its neighbors from repeating stuff like the Yom Kippur War. What happens when everyone in the region has nukes? Wouldn't that then negate the use of nukes all around and open the situation for a possible gang-banging of Israel?

Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush."Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."